This Makes It All Worth It - A Followup

Earlier today I wrote about an email I received from Abraham (not his real name) and how he is starting to look to atheism. He said that it was partly due to deep thinking and partly due to things I said here on HDC. We had a very nice exchange of emails and he agreed to let me share them, which I did earlier today in This Makes It All Worth It

Well! Abraham read the emails I sent to him, and my elaboration on here (see above link) and said the following a bit ago:

Saw the post on the blog, and I appreciated it, and the comments. In terms of reading, not much so far. I did go to Wikipedia and looked up "atheism", and with your comment, it helped me greatly. I am now ready to say that I am, in fact, an atheist, and hope to be able to defend my knowing that God does not exist more in time (I did read your post on Dawkins Spectrum of Theistic Probablilty). I hope to learn more in time. I really am not that much into podcasts, but am willing to look at essays.

I told him he is now on the A-Team and that he will soon get to learn our secret handshake. :P

I had offered to share the podcasts with him that I feel have been so helpful to me. I also asked him which books he's read on the subject.

So hey, I need your help! Let's compile a list for new atheists. I'd like to put books, essays and anything else on there that you've found helpful in your godless travels. Believe it or not, I have read very little of the classic stuff on atheism/religion/etc.

What would you recommend to Abraham? Which one or 2 sources did you find most informative and helpful once you were comfortable calling yourself an atheist (or the label of your choice)? Remember, he's come over to the Dark Side now, so we don't have to convince him. Now it's about information, insight, and being able to defend his lack of belief in gods. Please leave comments with the books, essays or resources you recommend and briefly how you felt they were helpful to you. Thanks very much! :)

A Revelation!

I realized something this morning. As you might know, I have a second blog with a Catholic friend of mine called AtheistCatholic. We have tried to keep the atmosphere friendly, but the comments get a bit heated and get very debate-like which drives me nuts.

I don't like to debate. For someone like me, it makes me incredibly frustrated. Well, I don't mind having arguments with some people. For instance, I can disagree with my husband and many of my friends and we can have a friendly argument where we have different points of view. I usually end up feeling we both hopefully learned something and it seems productive. Awesome.

But there are some people (and some types of people) that I just can't stand arguing with. With them it turns into a debate and I end up feeling extremely frustrated or downright angry. I don't like being frustrated or angry. My revelation is why it's so irritating.

It's because they don't play fair. They use logical fallacies like cats take naps. They play the "offended card" at the slightest disagreement. But the main reason is that their logic is so flawed that it makes me feel crazy just trying to figure out what they said.

My problem is that I can tell that they are doing these things intuitively now, but I can't name the logical fallacy or explain the flawed logic and straighten it out. Sometimes it's because I know the topic well enough to understand it, but not well enough to explain the mistakes of someone else. For this issue, the only solution I see is to learn more deeply about the topics that matter to me.

And I guess I can study the logical fallacies more, right? But the flawed logic, that just boggles my mind. I think I need to study that more. If you have any suggestions for good books that teach logic, let me know! Preferably something that is understandable in everyday language.

Do you have people that you deal with who don't play fair and are really irritating to argue with? How do you deal with them? How do you avoid debating but still get your point across? I can't figure that out either.

 

The Secret To Teen Power is Harmful Bullshit

Awhile ago my friend's daughter turned 21 and received a copy of The Secret to Teen Power by Paul Harrington. While I'll leave it to you to mull over giving a teen book to someone turning 21, it was not well received. Of course, having written a previous article titled The Law of Attraction - And The Secret - Are Bullshit, I was keen to see how ‘insightful and helpful’ this new book was. My friend was kind enough to send it to me. It's taken me a year to get up the energy to even look at this piece of work.

My first surprise was that it wasn't written by Rhonda Byrne, who wrote The Secret. The guy who wrote this bunch of drivel is an employee for Byrne, although in the acknowledgments he says she is his best friend and mentor as well.

Let's cut to the chase of this book, which is #6 in teen health/mental health on Amazon. The reviews are mostly glowing. The ones I read were of parents and people who gave the book to kids, which I find disturbing.

Here is exactly what the Secret is: (pg 5-6)

According to science, there are certain laws that govern the Universe. There's the law of gravity - whatever goes up must come down. And there's Einstein's law of relativity - everything in the Universe is made of energy. And then there's "string theory" - everything in the Universe vibrates, everything has its own vibe. But the most powerful law in the entire Universe is ... the law of attraction. THE SECRET is the law of attraction. Everything that happens in your life all comes down to attraction. You attract all the stuff that happens to you,  every last little thing, no matter whether it's totally awesome or truly awful, it's all about you. And you do it with the power of your thoughts. Whatever you think about, that's what goes down, that's what happens.

OMFSM! My brain exploded! My BS meter overloaded. And I only got to page 6! Not only is this bullshit, it's Harmful Bullshit. We need some sanity! On the book’s page on Amazon, this is the first (most excellent) review, which sums up some of my thoughts:

Spot On!

I found this article the other day that I want to share with you. As an atheist I often get religious people making some pretty big assumptions about me. I'm sure you do too. They are boringly common, tediously repetitive and astoundingly stereotypical. (I freely admit though, I am just as guilty of making assumptions about religious people and people in general. It's a common thing to do)

So this woman, Alise Wright, is married to a man who deconverted. She said she made some pretty big assumptions when he told her he didn't believe in God anymore. So this is her advice to other Christians on dealing with us godless heathens. I think they are really great!

Surviving a Conversation with an Atheist

1. Please don’t assume that they’re evil. ...The idea that because someone doesn’t believe in God means that they will become a murderer is very frustrating, particularly as the wife of one of “those people.” C.S. Lewis suggested that one of the proofs for God is our common morality. To assume that because someone lacks belief in God means that they no longer possess a sense of right and wrong strikes me as a strange way to prove God’s existence.

Her thoughts here, the last sentence especially, are really excellent. I would add that people get their morality from society and their role models. Atheists, humanists and freethinkers discuss and try to improve their ethics as society evolves and matures.

2. Please don’t assume that it’s just a phase. Most atheists who have “deconverted” from a religious background have studied it and other religions thoroughly before choosing not to believe. Painting it as a “phase” denies the seriousness of both their study and their decision. I would certainly not want to have any encounter with God resulting in a closer devotion to my faith called a phase and neither should we use that terminology for those who have left the faith.

Right! Most atheists deconvert after much study of the religion they are leaving, as well as other religions of the world. It's a tough decision to make, and most do not take it lightly.

Preparing For The Rapture on May 21

According to some crackpot, May 21, 2011 is when the Rapture is going to happen. I am scheduling a party for my local group of heathens on May 22 to celebrate. Either way the heathens win. If the Rapture happens, May 22 will be the first day of living in a christian-free world. If it doesn't, well then we were right. Again.

My awesome husband Butch found this online and I have to share it with you. What every atheist can say to God if the Rapture happens and we end up standing before him in judgment:

“But what if you’re wrong?” So goes the common questions posed to atheists by Christians. Putting aside for a moment the obvious retort (what if they are wrong and another religion is right?) I decided to really organize my thoughts a bit. What would I say if I was wrong, the Christians were right, and a moment after dying I found myself before the blinding majesty of Yahweh with Christ at his right hand?


Oh. Oh dear. I see. Well, I guess this is about as close to incontrovertible evidence for your existence as I could have ever demanded. Actually, as a good skeptic I pray you won’t get offended if I entertain the possibility that I’m experiencing a hypoxia-induced hallucination. But, I’ll just go along with this for now.

I’m not going to kneel or anything if you don’t mind. That would kind of be shutting the barn door after the cows have run out, don’t you think? Besides: by your will, I was thrust into life in a very undignified manner and state, so the least you could do would be to let me leave it in better circumstances. And really, that would be the very, very least you could do. You know, now that the initial shock of being dead is starting to wear off, I find myself getting angry. I’m trying to restrain it, but this whole situation is… absurd. According to most accounts, this is the part where you judge me. Who the hell are you to be a moral judge? You’re a sadistic, genocidal sex-obsessed tyrant. All my life, I laughed off those Christians who accused me of “hating God”. Like I told them, it wasn’t that I hated you; I just genuinely didn’t think you existed. But I did hate the idea of you. I didn’t see evidence to believe in any gods, but you in particular seemed like a logical contradiction. I was glad that the Bible was a work of-seeming-fiction because the belief that all of the most terrible things in the world were, at the worst, designed by or, at the best, permitted by an all-powerful conscious being was too horrible to not hate. It’s oddly refreshing to find that all this time I was outraged at something more tangible.

What Scientific Concept Would Improve Everyone's Cognitive Toolkit?

Recently The Edge published their annual Question, "What Scientific Concept Would Improve Everyone's Cognitive Toolkit?" which they posed to 164 people.

"The term 'scientific"is to be understood in a broad sense as the most reliable way of gaining knowledge about anything, whether it be the human spirit, the role of great people in history, or the structure of DNA. A "scientific concept" may come from philosophy, logic, economics, jurisprudence, or other analytic enterprises, as long as it is a rigorous conceptual tool that may be summed up succinctly (or "in a phrase") but has broad application to understanding the world."

Here are just a few excerpts that I think you might find interesting:

Sam Harris: We Are Lost In Thought

...Thinking is the substance of every social relationship and cultural institution we have. It is also the foundation of science. But our habitual identification with the flow of thought — that is, our failure to recognize thoughts as thoughts, as transient appearances in consciousness — is a primary source of human suffering and confusion. ...
...Our religions are clearly false, even if certain classically religious experiences are worth having. If we want to actually understand the mind, and overcome some of the most dangerous and enduring sources of conflict in our world, we must begin thinking about the full spectrum of human experience in the context of science.
But we must first realize that we are lost in thought.

P.Z. Myers: The Mediocrity Principle

...The mediocrity principle simply states that you aren't special. The universe does not revolve around you, this planet isn't privileged in any unique way, your country is not the perfect product of divine destiny, your existence isn't the product of directed, intentional fate, and that tuna sandwich you had for lunch was not plotting to give you indigestion. Most of what happens in the world is just a consequence of natural, universal laws — laws that apply everywhere and to everything, with no special exemptions or amplifications for your benefit — given variety by the input of chance.

Atheists Expressing Sympathy

I found a site called Sympathy 101 for Atheists and I thought I'd share it with you. Dealing with death can be extremely painful and sad, but it happens to all of us eventually. As atheists, most of the people we know are probably religious. How can we be genuine and honest and still be sympathetic to our religious loved ones when someone dies?

Atheists are often seen as cold because we don't have faith. We see death as an end to our lives, end of story. Religious people see death as a transition to something greater.  But we feel pain and emotion and loss just as much as anyone else. I think it might even be harder for atheists to lose a loved one than a religious person because they have hope (albeit false) that they will see their beloved in the afterlife while the godless know that death is final and there will not be any reunions.

So, how can we express our sympathies to someone who has lost a loved one while still maintaining our integrity and honesty? Here are some examples from the site:

Recognize the loss and express sorrow. If you knew the deceased, express your shared loss.

• "I'm so sorry for your loss."


• "I was sad to hear of his death."


• "It seems so unfair."

Express your appreciation of the deceased by relating positive ways the person affected your life or the life of the grieving friend or loved one.

• "She made the world a better place with all she did."


• "Every time your dad called, your face lit up."

Talk about how your friend or loved one made the deceased person's life better.

A Delicate Situation

As you may know, I used to unquestioningly believe in the power of "energy". I became an atheist long before I became a skeptic. I still "knew" that there was an energy force in the universe, that we reincarnated after death, that there was justice in the form of karma, and that people could be healed by energy.

I never had any reason to doubt my beliefs. In fact, I had a lot of selective bias that showed I was pretty good at giving readings (I didn't know it but I was good at warm and cold readings), and I was very good at doing energy healings. People told me they felt better just talking to me. Now I know that just paying attention to people can be help someone feel better. I did reiki healing which is very comforting. I would pay a lot of attention to a person and really listen to them compassionately. The placebo effect did the rest.

Long before I discovered skepticism I heard something about the power of suggestion, so without knowing I was doing science (roughly) I tested out the claim that energy healing is all about just making people feel cared for and is no better than placebo. I "turned off" my healing hands (reiki) several times and people still thanked me and told me I gave them a wonderful healing.

That's when I started getting out of it all. I realized I was just doing therapy for people, and that it was psychological and not "magical" so I gracefully extricated myself from the spiritual community.

I had many friends in the spiritual community back then. Most of them stopped talking to me when I stopped giving readings and healings. One woman, we'll call her Barbara, kept asking me for readings. She would call me all the time, every few days, asking for advice. I am horrible at confrontation, so after trying to tell her I didn't do readings anymore, I broke out the cards and went ahead and tried to help her. I did my best, but I started to feel more and more uncomfortable as time went on.

Evaluating Scientific Studies

One thing we all have to do as skeptics is see what other people are saying or studying and evaluate it to see if it stands up. No one person can do all the research needed in even just one subject. Lots of scientists and people need to contribute to science in many different ways. There's a system set up where studies are peer reviewed. Science involves lots of people, so it's not perfect but it is self-correcting and it's by far the best way to go about understanding and learning about the universe.

Never rely on one scientist. That would be an appeal to authority. It's not to say you can't look to a scientist and value his work, but it should be peer reviewed and replicated by others as well. Scientists really do need to stand on the shoulders of giants, and to have other scientists stand next to them.

The other day I was listening to an older episode of The Skeptic's Guide to the Universe: Episode 123 and Dr. Steven Novella was talking about this subject, regarding fringe science. It was interesting enough that I transcribed part of the episode to share with you. You can extrapolate this information when reading about studies done especially in the paranormal/fringe areas.

First he was talking about how scientists have to study scientific literature. As skeptics we also have to at least have a grasp on how things work. Also he explains where skeptics come in. Here's what he said:

39:35 You have to develop the ability and the skill to interpret the literature, even if you're not doing research in that area. What scientific skeptics are trying to do is provide the kind of peer review and critical analysis that typically happens in mainstream science, and apply that to more of these fringe areas because mainstream scientists are ignoring it, out of hand, usually.

A few minutes later, Dr. Novella was talking about science that claimed to verify the supernatural (psychic dogs and other phenomena. Listen to the whole episode for the complete story).
44:47 In order for science to be compelling enough to establish a new phenomenon in science, we need to see a few things, all at the same time:

1. Science that has good methodology, where any artifacts are weeded out.


2. Results that are statistically significant.


3. Replication, so we know it's not just one lab or one scientist.


4. An effect size that is above noise.

That doesn't even include a mechanism which would be the icing on the cake.

Great Reason or Atheist or Science Quotes Needed

I need your help. I'm going to church soon with my Religion of the Month Club (a subgroup of Morgantown Atheists) and I have the idea of putting an envelope in the collection plate when it comes around. In the envelope I want a few really AWESOME quotes from brilliant people. Preferably not nasty, but very smart. I am asking for your suggestions! Which reason/atheism/brilliant/freethinker quotes should I put in the envelope?

The Science of Persuasion

The other day I gave you a transcript from a lecture. The article was titled Why People Defend Their Dogma. At the end I promised a follow-up with some practical advice. And here it is. They did another episode of Reasonable Doubts, Episode 70, where they talked about how to persuade people, especially about science. They talked about a professor who has done some studies. I have written up a transcript of the salient parts of the conversation.

Partial Transcript:

37:18 If the goal is not to score points, if the goal is actually to persuade people, if the morally superior goal is to win minds rather than just make people look stupid, then tone really does matter. Psychology has some things to say about how we should best go about trying to persuade people to really, any position, but even more specifically to a scientific position that they may otherwise feel threatened by,  or may conflict with their worldview.

38:07 It's an empirical issue. What is likely to be persuasive or off-putting or not is a testable question. There are people right now researching how you package factual issues and seeing if that affects the rate at which people believe, disbelieve or deny them.

One of the examples of this, there is a researcher who's name is Geoffrey Monroe from Towson University who has done some studies on peoples' willingness to agree with belief consisting information as opposed to information that's inconsistent with beliefs as a function of things like how the information is presented to them.

So he had a piece on Science and Religion Today where he folded this into the debate about, do you alienate people by using blunt language that offends them. The theory behind this that people don't, as most people probably realize, they don't simply make up their mind on the basis of factual, cognitive, cold type calculations. This is one aspect that frustrates us, is that when we are debating with somebody, it quickly becomes apparent that the facts of evolution in some cases won't make a difference, if the person has an emotional investment.

So people hold attitudes because they are linked to aspects of your self-identity. As stated in Terror Management Theory, if you have a worldview that can be threatened, you get defensive. You circle your wagons as if attacked. In the same way, with factual issues like scientific-type things, religious people hold these as part of their broader self-identity.

A Source For Helpful Movie Reviews

Anyone can go to IMDB for a movie review these days. Or, like me, you can read the little blurb on Netflix and make your decision that way. Usually I just want to know the basic premise of the movie, who's in it, and who directed it. I don't listen to the opinions of many people (famous, friend or family) when it comes to recommendations and the like because most people don't know me very well. All they can tell me is what they thought of the movie for themselves, not for me. And I'm an Odd Duck, to be sure. I don't like a lot of things that are raved about. And movies or things that most people don't care for I think are great. I don't often agree with popular opinion.

Why am I going on about this? Well, there is one thing I absolutely have zero tolerance for; a bible thumping movie. I can't stand religious propaganda shoved down my throat. Not long after Left Behind went to DVD my dad rented it thinking it was Sci Fi. (we used to go out to dinner and watch a movie afterward as sort of a regular family night) I saw that Kirk Cameron was in it, thought that was a bad sign, but gave it the benefit of the doubt and promptly wasted 2 hours of my life to that dreck. That night Butch (my nearly perfect husband) and I made a pact never to sit through a horrid movie again.

So when I see a movie preview that could look like it's a "God Movie" I would rather steer clear. Unfortunately a lot of god movies mask it in the previews, and some movies that really don't have a strong pro-god/pro-religion tone might look like it in the previews.

Enter Christian Answers Movie Reviews! My friend Dan shared this site with me and now I am passing it on to you because I actually found it useful.

I picked a movie I was leery about, The Book of Eli, and here's what I discovered. First, they describe a lot of scenes so it is a bit of a spoiler. Second, I learned it's a pretty god-heavy movie that would probably set my nerves on edge. Here's part of the review:

Talk To An Atheist on Atheist Hotline

For some time I’ve been working behind the scenes on a way for atheists and people questioning their faith to talk to someone who can give some friendly atheist advice. With the help of my fellow Morgantown Atheists friends, we have started a voice mail system, an email address and a website called Atheist Hotline!

Ways to Contact Us:

• AtheistHotline.com


• (304) 534-9440


• atheisthotline@morgantownatheists.com

You can call, email or post a question on the site now. The phone number is to a voice mail system. We are volunteering this service so we will get back to you as soon as we can. Leave your email address if you call, too please. It will be easiest for us to get back to you by email.

Our Goals:

• Let atheists know they are not alone


• Clear up common misconceptions about atheists in general


• Provide people with information resources when needed


• Personal experiences from atheists to help you with your perspective


• Carefully helping people who are questioning their faith - in need of reason, etc.


• Carefully helping atheists who have troubles with their family


• Offering moral support to atheists and people questioning their faith


• Friendly advice from atheists

What we're NOT:

Ideas About Atheist Groups

As you may know, I'm the co-cat herder (co-director) of Morgantown Atheists, a local group for unbelievers. I'm also the coordinator for Morgantown Coalition of Reason, an umbrella organization that encompasses Morgantown Atheists and other local groups so that we can work together in the name of Reason.

The funny thing is, I'm not really a people person. Like a lot of atheists (supposedly), I'm quite an outsider, as much of a hermit as I can get away with, in fact. I have never liked going out in crowds or socializing with large groups of people.

Why am I telling you all of this? Because I have realized something that I want to share with you. Even though I'm a curmudgeonly hermit-y atheist, I love going to the 3 atheist/freethinker meetings we have every month. That's 3 Sundays a month where I happily leave the house and go socialize with a small group of people. And I look forward to it. The one or 2 Sundays where we don't meet I miss it.

Even people like me benefit from social community and contact. The beauty of the atheist/freethinker community is that we are relatively like-minded. We have a foundation of common ground. But we are also quite different, of course, which is good because that makes things interesting. The added bonus of freethinkers, skeptics and atheists is that we seem relatively level-headed (overall - there are exceptions,  of course) and we argue and discuss matters with interest and fairness. No drama llama is invited! So it's actually fun and mentally stimulating.

I think we all need some type of community, which is one thing that religion has in its favor that being a lone atheist does not.

But this is easily remedied. I thought I'd share some thoughts on how to get involved with a secular group of like-minded people. If none exist in your area, you can start one up.

Tips For Finding A Local Atheist/Humanist/Freethinker/Skeptical Community

The New Ten Commandments

Awhile ago I wrote about the 10 commandments. I then rewrote them for my personal moral code, calling them Neece's Principles. No need to have anyone commanding anyone.

Christopher Hitchens just wrote a 3 page piece for Vanity Fair about the 10 commandments titled The New Commandments. He goes through the KJV version and talks about where they are good and where they are not so good. Here is his summation:

What emerges from the first review is this: the Ten Commandments were derived from situational ethics. They show every symptom of having been man-made and improvised under pressure. They are addressed to a nomadic tribe whose main economy is primitive agriculture and whose wealth is sometimes counted in people as well as animals. They are also addressed to a group that has been promised the land and flocks of other people: the Amalekites and Midianites and others whom God orders them to kill, rape, enslave, or exterminate. And this, too, is important because at every step of their arduous journey the Israelites are reminded to keep to the laws, not because they are right but just because they will lead them to become conquerors (of, as it happens, almost the only part of the Middle East that has no oil).

So here is a rundown of how he fixes them:

• One to Three can go, "since they have nothing to do with morality and are no more than a long, rasping throat clearing by an admittedly touchy dictator. Mere fear of unseen authority is not a sound basis for ethics." (the invisible sky daddy flexes his muscles and demands worship.).


• He also says we don't have to ban sculpture and art (idols).


• Four. Gone. Pointless. (don't work on the sabbath, except black sabbath, of course!)


• Five, respect elders, sure. But also ban child abuse. What a concept! (I'd add that parents should only get respect like anyone else, when they earn it.)


• Six, taken care of by modern law. Don't murder. (Don't kill under almost all circumstances.) (although I think assisted suicide for terminally ill people should be legal)


• Seven, he seems to destroy too.  (adultery) (and yeah, what about saying rape is bad? especially pedophilia and that kind of stuff?)


• Eight, ok. This one is good. Don't steal. (stealing)


• Nine, don't lie. Also basically good. (lying about your neighbor)


• Ten, women aren't property. This one is pointless and harmful in that it makes you a sinner just from your thoughts. (don't lust after your neighbor's goods or wife)

Other evils of human society that should be denounced, according to Hitchens:

• genocide


• slavery


• rape


• child abuse


• sexual repression


• white-collar crime


• wanton destruction of the natural world


• people who talk on cell phones in restaurants (and movie theatres, or who talk on the phone or text while driving!)


• people who blow themselves up while shouting 'god is great!' (and any other kind of jihadism or crusade)


• racism


• using people as private property


• condemning people for their inborn nature (like homosexuality, etc)

And this is how he finishes:

"Be willing to renounce any god or any religion if any holy commandments should contradict any of the above. In short: Do not swallow your moral code in tablet form."

Good advice! I think I stand by the principles I came up with for myself. What are yours? Do you agree with Christopher Hitchens?

I'm Curious!

The other day I shared my favorite podcasts, one of which was the SGU. Well, I just found a new one! From Skepchick.org with Rebecca Watson comes a new podcast called Curiosity Aroused. There's one episode up now which is about calorie restriction for long life. The episode is about 20 minutes long and you can subscribe through iTunes.

In the first episode, they talk to Monica Reinagel who is pretty neat in her own right. She's a nutrition expert and through her short podcast and blog she helps weed through the hype and nonsense of nutrition. As a person who wonders what is fact and what is bullshit when it comes to food, diet and the like, it's very cool to find a resource for good information.

Here are her sites:

www.nutritiondata.com: her blog is on here along with a wealth of information.

http://nutritiondiva.quickanddirtytips.com/: Her podcasts are on here. If you go to listen or read and episode, you can then find the link to iTunes to subscribe and get them all. They are each about 5 minutes long.

Do you have any great resources for good nutrition and diet that are based in science and research? Please feel free to share! :)

The Secret Divides Part 2

The other day I wrote about a woman named Ruth who emailed me asking for some advice. Ruth's sister Esther (not their real names for their privacy) had been introduced to The Secret by her husband and now avoided Ruth because she said she is toxic. The first post is called The Secret Divides and I gave my initial opinion, then asked Ruth for some clarification, as well as asked you for your take on the situation.

Ruth said the following:

My sister and I are 5 years apart, she is in her late 30s I am in my early 30s. We live on opposite sides of the country.

[Esther and I] talked on Christmas - but only if I agreed to be play nice. We did exchange gifts. As long as I am willing to play along, she will speak to me - but it is obviously strained and only to make my mom happy. I have always had issues with hypocrisy or injustice - and I hate the fact that she doesn't have the respect for me and my feelings that she expects for herself - but I try.

Is there anything within the teachings that I can use to help her see my even a tiny bit of the pain that we feel when she says Dad, Grandma or I got what we asked for?  I don't want to destroy her belief - she has a right to it and I can respect that - as hard as it is for me to refrain from argument.

I am not the kind to sit and let people wallow in ignorance. I take serious exception when someone comes to a conclusion based on erroneous fact or assumption - that is my job. It is my job to present evidence and arguments and win. I can't do that here - and that alone throws me so off balance I am unsure how to proceed.

I have been thinking about this for 2 days. I'm afraid I can't really give Ruth what she's after. I don't have a copy of The Secret but I am quite familiar with the law of attraction as I spelled out awhile ago in a post called The Law of Attraction, and the Secret, are Bullshit. For your convenience, here are the basic rules for the law of attraction again:

The Secret Divides

As you may know, I make no bones in saying books like The Secret and their ilk are complete bullshit. I wrote about it awhile ago - The Law of Attraction, and the Secret, are Bullshit.  Beyond the bullshit I have found them to be harmful if swallowed. If you believe what the book says, you will have a distorted worldview. This can be extremely detrimental to your own thought processes, and as you will see below, can also skew how you look at someone who is in an unfortunate situation.

For example, let's say you believe that your thoughts dictate what will come to you. Then someone steals your wallet while you're at the grocery store. According to The Secret, you brought that negative event to you by worrying and thinking negative thoughts. Because you were afraid of having your wallet stolen, you worried about it in the back of your mind, and that made that guy behind you decide to run up and steal it. Wow! You are so powerful! The universe listens to your thoughts and acts upon them, even when you aren't paying attention!

In this fantasy world, the universe is a busy-body accountant, tallying your thoughts and then scheduling events to correspond. Ridiculous!

So wow, what would happen if you really focused your attention? What would happen if you got rid of all of your negative thoughts (not humanly possible or healthy)  and wished for only good things? Perfect health? Wealth? A perfect spouse? Sure, why not! If you can dream it, you can make it happen. (cough cough BULLSHIT!!)

Of course, here's the catch. It doesn't happen overnight. In fact, it might be years and years of wishful thinking before something comes true. (Coincidence?!) Oh, and most likely you actually DID things to make it finally happen. Maybe you made decisions and took actions that led to you finally acheiving your dream.

But that's not magic. The universe doesn't work the way The Secret says it does. If it did, my life would be very different because of the power of my thoughts.

2012 Doomsday Fast Approaches!

OMG, yo! Hide the good silver! Run for your lives! The Mayans say the world will end December 21, 2012 and that's only 2 years and a month away! Whatever will we do?!

Of course the Mayans themselves didn't survive till 2012, so maybe they aren't the best group to ask about such things. :P

Recently a friend of mine mentioned the 2012 phenomenon as if it were true. Unfortunately I didn't have the hard facts at my disposal so I told him it's not going to happen and left it at that. But I thought I'd look up some more information so when your mother starts talking about the end of the world, you will have some facts to back you up.

Lucky for me, NASA and Wikipedia have pages to explain where the concept came from and what scientific basis there is for it (none, thank you very much).

Some people seem to love the idea of predicting cataclysmic events and the destruction of the world. Of course, since we're still here, so far they have been wrong every time. That's something in itself to consider.

NASA explains it all very succinctly in FAQ form:

Q: Are there any threats to the Earth in 2012? Many Internet websites say the world will end in December 2012.
A: Nothing bad will happen to the Earth in 2012. Our planet has been getting along just fine for more than 4 billion years, and credible scientists worldwide know of no threat associated with 2012.

Dark Chocolate and Other Tidbits of Goodness

If you're like me, and you enjoy dark chocolate, then I have some studies to share with you! I think they'll be helpful for the holidays as well as generally beneficial throughout the year. If you don't like chocolate (WTF, just kidding), see below for swine flu info, and other linky goodness.

Dark Chocolate Helps Ease Emotional Stress: A new study found that eating about an ounce and a half of dark chocolate a day for two weeks reduced levels of stress hormones in people who felt highly stressed. The chocolate also partially corrected other stress-related biochemical imbalances. "The study provides strong evidence that a daily consumption of 40 grams [1.4 ounces] during a period of 2 weeks is sufficient to modify the metabolism of healthy human volunteers," the scientists say.

That led me to a study from last December. It's rather small and involves self-reporting, but it could be a promising line for further research, and could be something you experiment with yourself to see if it works for you:

Dark Chocolate Lessens Cravings: Dark chocolate is far more filling than milk chocolate, lessening our craving for sweet, salty and fatty foods. In other words, eating dark chocolate may be an efficient way to keep your weight down over the holidays (and throughout the year!) The dark chocolate gives a feeling of satiety.